Letting Agent deposit dispute management complaint

Silian

Sorry, this is a long one.

Issue 1: When we vacated our unfurnished rented propertyafter a 2.5 year tenancy we accidently took some items that were left by thelandlord at the start of our tenancy. Stupid mistake – I agree. This wasbrought to our attention a day after we vacated the property in the check outreport.

We immediately offered to return the items. This offer wasignored by the LA other than a note that our comments would be added to ourfile. This didn’t really surprise us. Nobody leaves a mop somewhere and expectsit to still be there two and a half years later. And the only reason to leave achair in an unfurnished flat is because the previous tenants left it and the LLwas too lazy to have it removed. We left it at that.

Fast forward a bit and we received a claim from the landlordagainst our deposit for items that had very little bearing to the check outreport. We disputed the claim. The LA advised us to make a counter offer. We refusedto make a counter offer and mentioned that we’ll be taking the case to TDS. TheLA informed us that if we continue to dispute the claim the LL would also claimfor the items in the check out report.

This made me laugh because the LA basically admitted that theclaim was without merit. It also made me very angry and I submitted the case toTDS.

The LA (acting on behalf of the LL) added items to the claimin their dispute. One of the things they added were: £135 for missing items.

I started the complaints process of the LA and received anemail a few days later saying that if we return the items they will remove theclaim for the missing items. I immediately replied affirmatively and receivedno response again. The case went to adjudication and TDS found in favour of thelandlord (no surprise there – the items where there when we checked in, theywere gone when we left. Luckily they only awarded half of the claim (£65) butthat does mean the LL received £10 for a 2.5 year old mop J).

Issue 2: During our tenancy there was a hidden leak thatcaused damage to the decoration. The LL fixed the leak during our tenancy butclaimed £180 to repaint the room. Because we were stupid, naive and trusted theagent we didn’t get anything in writing about this and were unable to provethat it was caused by a leak and that the LL was informed about it.

We requested one of our inspection reports where it shouldhave been recorded. We had most of the other ones, but were missing that onefor some reason. The LA informed us that they can’t give us the inspectionreport because it is a service provided to the LL (in other words: “we are notgoing to give this to you because it proves your case and not the LLs” J). We quoted the dataprotection act that gives us the right to request any information they holdthat relates to us. The agent denied that the inspection report had any bearingon us and refused to provide it to us or TDS. As expected TDS found in favourof the landlord as we couldn’t prove our case.

And now we finally get to my question.

Is there any point in continuing with the complaint process against the LA? On the one hand our deposit dispute was a victory with the LLonly receiving £230 of his ridiculous claim of +-£1900 and I would like to put this behind me.On the other hand the agent’s bad customer service and lying (yes, and ourstupidity in trusting them) caused us £155 and while I know I won’t get themoney back I would like to do my bit to stop this from happening to someoneelse.

(Just a final note. I am aware that the LA was acting on theinstructions of the LL. But nobody can be forced to lie on behalf of theirclient).

Pixie5740

Since participation in the Alternative Dispute Resolution process requires consent by both parties, the final decision of
the adjudicator is binding on both the landlord and tenant. It cannot be challenged except through a Court of Law – although the parties should seek their own independent legal advice first.

I don't understand your comments about the mop. If a mop was there at the start of the tenancy then a mop (not necessarily the original) should still be there when you move out. It also doesn't matter why the chair was in the property.

I take it there was a decent inventory from the start of your tenancy otherwise the LL wouldn't have been able to make a successful claim.

Silian

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Since participation in the Alternative Dispute Resolution process requires consent by both parties, the final decision of
the adjudicator is binding on both the landlord and tenant. It cannot be challenged except through a Court of Law – although the parties should seek their own independent legal advice first.

I don't understand your comments about the mop. If a mop was there at the start of the tenancy then a mop (not necessarily the original) should still be there when you move out. It also doesn't matter why the chair was in the property.

I take it there was a decent inventory from the start of your tenancy otherwise the LL wouldn't have been able to make a successful claim.

Sorry, I must not have explained properly. I am not upset that the TDS found in favour of the LL - I fully understand why they did.

My complaint is against the letting agent who couldn't just reply with: "yes, please take it back to the property " but instead ignored my offer to return it and then claimed for it at a later date when I couldn't dispute it anymore.